“The shareholders of Corpbank AD are ready to come back and to show how a bank should be managed”, said in the TV show of BTV Face to Face on December 16th, 2014 the attorney Menko Menkov in answer to the question what will happen if the court annuls the decision of the BNB to take away the license of Corpbank AD.

Attorney Menko Menkov represents the majority shareholder of Corpbank AD Tzvetan Vassilev and the company Bromak Ltd., as well as some of the parties affected in the case with revoking the banking license.

The attorney assures that the shareholders of Corpbank AD have willingness to restore the bank so that it continues to function, although so far they have not been given the opportunity to recover it. He recalled that according to the opinion of the Deputy Governor of the BNB and Head of the Banking Supervision Department of the BNB Stoyan Gounev only 500 million leva were necessary for the bank to continue to operate. “Such support was requested but not given because it was obvious that the main aim was to destroy the bank”, said attorney Menkov. According to him the direct and indirect effects are measurable, in billions, and they will be calculated from now on.

Asked why the case about revoking the license of Corpbank AD was delayed in court, the defender of Tzvetan Vassilev explained that the BNB had the biggest fault. He shared the opinion that the attitude of the BNB to the trial was disrespectful. The attorney added that the representatives of the BNB sent for this case were two jurisconsults who submitted power of attorney by the Governor of the BNB Ivan Iskrov. According to attorney Menkov not Iskrov but the Management Board of the BNB was the body whose act was being appealed and they had to designate representatives. “They could not form a power of attorney and we appeal the revocation of a whole banking license”, said the attorney indignantly.

According to him the court’s argument that depositors had no legal interest to appeal the decision of the Management Board for revocation of the license of Corpbank AD was not logical. “255 000 depositors could join this case”, said attorney Menkov .

He stressed that many of the actions of the BNB in the Corpbank AD’s case were illegal and gave an example with the appointment of the conservators. The attorney of Tzvetan Vassilev stated categorically that Elena Kostadinchev and Stanislav Lyutov didn’t meet the legal requirements under which they must have been for 5 years on a senior position in a commercial bank. During the period in which Corpbank AD was under special supervision, they ruled the bank to the detriment of depositors and shareholders, thought attorney Menkov and added: “The bank deteriorated its performance under their control”. He gave an example that the two conservators had requested 2.5 million leva per month for the management and maintenance of bank with money of the shareholders and depositors, which he said was unacceptable.

“How is it possible to give Corpbank AD the new Victoria bank and then the indicators turn out to be worsened. We want to know how the bank deliberately crashes for 3 or 4 months”, pointed out Menkov and wanted an expert opinion to be appointed, which should determine what was the condition of Corpbank AD up to July 30rd, 2014 when the conservators were appointed and “not up to September 30rd, 2014 when we all know what was already the condition of the bank”.

As far as the state money in the bank are concerned, the lawyer stated that “state money were not placed as a gift on deposit in the bank” and, in return, Corpbank AD purchased state bonds.

Attorney Menko Menkov asked the rhetorical question: “Who is afraid of Tzvetan Vassilev?”. He revealed that the majority shareholder asked in the period of pretrial proceedings to give explanations, which is "the dream of every prosecutor and investigator." Because of the obstacles to come in Bulgaria (as his passport was revoked and he was required every day to sign at the police station in Serbia) Tzvetan Vassilev offered this to happen by videoconference. The Prosecutor’s Office refused with the absurd statement that he was not defendant.

“As he is not a defendant, why they seek him through Interpol and pay attention – with a red bulletin, which is used for terrorists from the Islamic State?! Only defendants can be sought. His defendant order was given to the colleague Karadaliev and there is no reason not to be questioned by video conference call”, added Menkov.